Readers' comments

It is absolutely true that Obama is terribly humstrung by the Jewish lobby in the U.S. Congress. While Obama seeks to settle things with Iran, California congressman Ed Royce brags that he has 400 votes in the House of Representatives on a new bill that will impose "more" sanctions on Iran! As most sectors of the Iranian economy are already under sanctions, I can't think where those new sanctions will fall. And his effort is such an overkill that sounds to me as if the anti-Iranian hysteria in the U.S. Congress is just out of control.

I see Obama as "a Sisiphus," I see the U.S. Congess as "the Hades(the Israeli)deep cave," and I see the U.S. sanctions as "the boulder" of the tale that Obama won't be able to push out of the that cave! And, of course, outside the cave stands the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ready to push the boulder back in with his clouty Israeli Political Action Committee (IPAC)- if that boulder ever gets close to the cave's door!

The U.S. Sanctions can only be repealed by Congress. Obama has no authority to reverse them, only to suspend them temporarily on "national security" grounds. But he then will surely be demonized and busted by the pro-U.S. Jewish media as a "crypto-Muslim" who puts Israel's security at risk.

I conclude, therefore, that the negotiations on Iran's nuclear program will come to nothing - because the Israeli lobby and IPAC are working hard behind the scenes to see them fail! Nikos Retsos, retired professor

If the President is hamstrung by IAPAC, then he is also hamstrung by himself. The US winning this game of poker between itself and Iran relies on the US keeping the trump card of military intervention in hand. With the Syrian civil war, Obama tipped his hand and now it is doubtful if that trump card is even in the deck anymore.

If there is no threat of military intervention, Iran doesn't have much of an incentive not to build the weapons. For one they have too much oil, people, and territory to be turned into the international pariah like N. Korea. Their oil buys them patronage from the Chinese and this patronage is what will keep them afloat while the weapons are built. after that, the Iranian position is infinitely more secure. They have many US allies, strategic positions of the 5th Fleet base and the Strt. of Hormuz, and even US troops in Afghanistan in missile range as well as the willingness to use nuclear weapons in their only territory for defense.

Internationally, Obama has the bravado of a school yard bully (not the personality of, only the bravado). He will breathlessly trumpet his views and acts when he is able to impose them painlessly. For example, his administration has repeatedly scolded the Egyptians for the mess they are in, trying to use foreign aid as a carrot to get them back in line. He also shows little compunction to violate the territory of small states in order to chase after their enemies. When Clinton launched cruise missiles at AL-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, the chairman of the joint chiefs was sent in to give a 15 minute warning of what was going on. No such consideration was shown to the Libyan government in the recent raid or countries with targets for the drones. Iran is a much tougher nut to crack than collapsing Syria and unlike Syria, has something the world will want. If Obama can't out maneuver a Putin-helmed Russia to get approval for even missile strikes against Assad for the least of his crimes, there isn't much of a chance of him against the Russians and/or Chinese when stakes are higher.

The Iranians are buying time. If they can make weapons before 2016, they're home free. But if the sanctions continue to bite, or even bite harder, they might lose popular support for the nuclear program. Outside of a US invasion, Iranian capitulation is the only way the game can be won.

It's not IAPAC holding back Obama, it's his own refusal to take a stand that is holding him back.

As much as Obama would have liked to shoot a few misiles over Syria, it was the American people who stood up and said no. We are tired of these wars and the blood and money it sucks from us. While Israel and the politicians make like us to do their bidding, lets see what happens when it comes to a war.

Amin, the government must represent peoples will, the political constitution longs for people's wellbeing.
Launching missiles over Syria is just one punctual matter... the attitude to rule over local politics in foreign countries with great differences on cultural and religious matters is what get all these terrorists attacks, bombings, 9/11, kidnapping of US citizens, etc. In my opinion, terrorists are not just terrorist, they are feeded by the image of an common enemy: the US and US allies who wants to rule it all. Thats the vision of million people around the world, and some of them believe its more productive to go to war not on their own country but to the heart of the enemy.
As warriors we cant deny they are fulfilling a mission just as NATO soldiers do, and of course they kill innocent people.. just as NATO forces do in their "selective" missions. Those are war's side effects, and if we understand it like Bush said "War on terrorism" we must understand that as long as US/Europe keeps trying to control middle east governments extremist may appear and keep bombing innocent people which have no involvement at all on these political decisions. People must react and demand goverments to protect themselfs not with more violence, but with political wisdom.

Except the West has no interest in "controlling" Middle Eastern governments; they just want the chaos to stop for once so they don't have to constantly keep dealing with thousands of refugees, terrorists, and other horrific scenarios. And of course, so they can buy oil at a regular rate with some semblance of stability.

But these things never stop in the ME, even if there is absolutely no western interference.

What the west wants is not really radical or overbearing. They're simply operating with the same expectations for the Muslim world that they hold for every other society on the planet, but for some reason too many Muslim countries fail to achieve.

Q: What's the largest democracy in the ME? A: Iraq. That is depressing...